Self-serving -bijdrage van PISA Sahlberg over PISA met als ttiel  The PISA 2012 scores show the failure of 'market based' education reform (The Guardian van 8 december).

Pasi Sahlberg, de auteur van Finnish Lessons, ging op basis van een goede PISA-score en loftuitingen van het PISA-hoofdkwartier,  een jaar lang overal ter wereld verkondigden hoe degelijk het Fins onderwijs wel was: gemeenschappelijke lagere cyclus, minder uren lessen, geen niveaubewaking door de overheid, kwaliteit van de leraars, less is more,  …. Ook onze beleidsmensen, hervormers s.o., Klasse …stelden Finland voor als een te imiteren onderwijsparadijs. Zo werd voor de vele zegeningen  van een gemeenschappelijke eerste graad steevast naar Finland verwezen.

Sahmberg verzweeg tijdens zijn vele optredens  dat volgens studies van de universiteit van Helsinki van 2010 al gebleken was dat de Finse leerlingen al bij al vrij zwak presteerden voor de basisvakken en veel zwakker ook dan in 2001. In een grootscheeps onderzoek van 2012 werd dit door de universiteit van Helsinki bevestigd. Hij verzweeg ook dat 200 docenten wiskunde al in 2005 aan de alarmbel trokken en stelden dat de PISA-score totaal misleidend was,  omdat deze niet gebaseerd was op het toetsen van de prestaties voor wiskunde als vak (cultuurproduct).   Hij verzweeg verder dat zelfs PISA-onderzoekers hadden vastgesteld dat bij onderzoek in de hogere cyclus s.o. de relatie met de SES (b.v. scholingsgraad  van de ouders) even hoog was als in andere landen. Hij bleef pronken met de high quality en equity in Finland. Hij verzweeg ook dat de hoge PISA-score te maken had met het geringe aantal allochtone leerlingen in Finland en de homogene cultuur.  

Sahlberg zit nu heel verveeld met de gevoelige achteruitgang van Finland voor PISA-2012. Zijn reactie in ‘The Guardian’ en elders is merkwaardig, een mooi voorbeeld van rationalisatie. Waar zijn ‘Finnish lessons’ een beroep deden op de PISA-score, relativeert hij nu in sterke mate de waarde van het landenvergelijkend PISA-onderzoek. Hij verzwijgt ook de vele kritiek op het onderwijs in eigen land die de voorbije week te beluisteren viel: te weinig differentiatie in de nivellerende gemeenschappelijke lagere cyclus, te weinig eisen aan de leerlingen, te weinig lesuren, verwaarlozing van ‘culturele vakken, te weinig leraars wiskunde, wetenschappen …. voor de lagere cyclus secundair onderwijs en leraars die aan de universiteit te theoretisch zijn opgeleid,  lage prestaties van allochtone leerlingen ….   

In  de voorliggende bijdrage in The Guardian (zie bijlage) verzwijgt Sahlberg opnieuw de zwakke Finse leerprestaties volgens de universiteit van Helsinki. Hij moffelt ook de achteruitgang voor PISA en de kritische reacties erop in eigen land weg.  Hij wekt ook ten onrechte de indruk dat alle landen met nationale onderwijstests - niveaubewaking door de overheid -  slecht presteerden voor PISA. Voor de Aziatische landen is dit in elk geval geenszins het geval. Het is precies jammer dat er in Finland de voorbije jaar te weinig niveaubewaking was door de overheid waardoor de niveaudaling  van het onderwijs al te laat officieel werd vastgesteld.   Sahlberg kon evengoed een bijdrage geschreven hebben over landen met te weinig niveaubewaking door de overheid die achteruitgang boekten voor PISA.

Bijlage: ‘The PISA 2012 scores show the failure of 'market based' education reform

Pasi Sahlberg    

theguardian.com, Sunday 8 December 2013

When PISA results were first presented 12 years ago, the participating countries were excited to see how their school systems perform compared to one another. Now the launch of the fifth PISA results is accompanied by more criticism than before due to the issues with cross-country comparisons and the dominant role that PISA plays in determining priorities for national education policies. Whatever its limitations are, the data from more than half a million 15-year-olds around the world is now here, and we should try to make the best out of them.

Another handicap of using PISA to inform national policies is to admire the highest scoring school systems and thereby fail to see the common patterns from the data. PISA consumers should note that not every high-scoring school system is successful. A school system is "successful" if it performs above the OECD average in mathematics, reading literacy and science, and if students' socio-economic status has a weaker-than-average impact on students' learning outcomes. The most successful education systems in the OECD are Korea, Japan, Finland, Canada and Estonia.

My personal takeaway from the PISA 2012 study is how it proves that fashionable Global Educational Reform Movement (GERM) is built on wrong premises. GERM, that emerged from England's Education Reform Act 1988 and was further accelerated by the No Child Left Behind and the Race to the Top reforms in the US, assumes that market mechanisms are the best vehicles for whole system improvements. GERM has acted like a virus that "infects" education systems as it travels around the world. The infection can be diagnosed by checking the state of the following five symptoms.

First is increased competition between schools that is boosted by school choice and related league tables offering parents information that helps them make the right "consumer" decisions. Second is standardization of teaching and learning that sets detailed prescriptions how to teach and what students must achieve so that schools' performance can be compared to one another. Third is systematic collection of information on schools' performance by employing standardized tests. These data are then used to hold teachers accountable for students' achievement. Fourth is devaluing teacher professionalism and making teaching accessible to anyone through fast-track teacher preparation. Fifth is privatizing public schools by turning them to privately governed schools through charter schools, free schools and virtual schools.

In 2012 when the OECD collected the latest PISA data from 65 education systems, GERM had already spread to become a global pandemic. The most notable victims of GERM are schools and communities in the US, England, New Zealand, Australia, Sweden and Chile. The wealth of fresh data available now begs an interesting question: do PISA findings reinforce the premises of GERM being right? Well, let's take a look at three key findings of PISA 2012 to see how GERM contradicts with that evidence.

Countries that give schools autonomy over curricula and student assessments often perform better. This finding is orthogonal to the basic premise of GERM that assumes that externally set teaching standards and aligned standardized testing are preconditions for success. PISA shows how success is often associated with balanced professional autonomy with a collaborative culture in schools. Evidence also shows how high performing education systems engage teachers to set their own teaching and learning targets, to craft productive learning environments, and to design multiple forms student assessments to best support student learning and school improvement.

High average learning outcomes and system-wide equity are often interrelated. Equity in education means that students' socio-economic status has little impact on how well they learn in school. Equity is high in the agenda in all successful school systems. Focus on equity means to give high priority to universal early childhood programs, comprehensive health and special education services in schools, and balanced curriculum that has equal weight in arts, music, and sports, and academic studies. Fairness in resource allocation is important for equity, too. PISA 2012 shows that fair resourcing is related to the success of the entire school system: High student performance tends to be linked to more equitably resource allocation between advantaged and disadvantaged schools.

School choice does not improve the performance of education system. School choice and competition between schools are related to greater levels of segregation in the education system. That, in turn, may have adverse consequences for equity in learning opportunities and outcomes. Indeed, successful education systems do better than those that have expanded school choice. All successful school systems have a strong commitment to maintain their public schools and local school control. PISA 2012 data show that the prevalence of charter and free schools with related competition for students have no discernible relationship with student learning.

PISA 2012 also reaffirms the appeal by millions of teachers worldwide: pay us better. While paying teachers well is only part of the story, higher salaries can help countries to attract more young people to choose teaching as their lifelong career. PISA results show that more successful countries pay more to their teachers and give them higher status in society.

Countries that want to be higher on the PISA tables should understand what it truly takes to get there.